Multiteam Systems Research Articles

Teamwork situated in multiteam systems: Key lessons learned and future opportunities.

Many important contexts requiring teamwork, including health care, space exploration, national defense, and scientific discovery, present important challenges that cannot be addressed by a single team working independently. Instead, the complex goals these contexts present often require effectively coordinated efforts of multiple specialized teams working together as a multiteam system (MTS). For almost 2 decades, researchers have endeavored to understand the novelties and nuances for teamwork and collaboration that ensue when teams operate together as "component teams" in these interdependent systems. In this special issue on the settings of teamwork, we aim to synthesize what is known thus far regarding teamwork situated in MTS contexts and offer new directions and considerations for developing, maintaining, and sustaining effective collaboration in MTSs. Our review of extant research on MTSs reveals 7 key lessons learned regarding teamwork situated in MTSs, but also reveals that much is left to learn about the science and practice of ensuring effective multiteam functioning. We elaborate these lessons and delineate 4 major opportunities for advancing the science of MTSs as a critical embedding context for collaboration and teamwork, now and in the future. (PsycINFO Database Record

The science of teamwork: Progress, reflections, and the road ahead.

We need teams in nearly every aspect of our lives (e.g., hospitals, schools, flight decks, nuclear power plants, oil rigs, the military, and corporate offices). Nearly a century of psychological science has uncovered extensive knowledge about team-related processes and outcomes. In this article, we draw from the reviews and articles of this special issue to identify 10 key reflections that have arisen in the team literature, briefly summarized here. Team researchers have developed many theories surrounding the multilayered aspects of teams, such that now we have a solid theoretical basis for teams. We have recognized that the collective is often stronger than the individual, initiating the shift from individual tasks to team tasks. All teams are not created equal, so it is important to consider the context to understand relevant team dynamics and outcomes, but sometimes teams performing in different contexts are more similar than not. It is critical to have teamwork-supportive organizational conditions and environments where psychological safety can flourish and be a mechanism to resolve conflicts, ensure safety, mitigate errors, learn, and improve performance. There are also helpful teamwork competencies that can increase effectiveness across teams or tasks that have been identified (e.g., coordination, communication, and adaptability). Even if a team is made up of experts, it can still fail if they do not know how to cooperate, coordinate, and communicate well together. To ensure the improvement and maintenance of effective team functioning, the organization must implement team development interventions and evaluate relevant team outcomes with robust diagnostic measurement. We conclude with 3 main directions for scientists to expand upon in the future: (a) address issues with technology to make further improvements in team assessment, (b) learn more about multiteam systems, and (c) bridge the gap between theory and practice. In summary, the science of teams has made substantial progress but still has plenty of room for advancement. (PsycINFO Database Record

The complexity, diversity, and science of primary care teams.

This article examines the past, present and future of primary care and teamwork. It begins with a definition and description of primary care-its uniqueness, diversity and complexity, including the historical role of teams within primary care. The article then reviews the emergence of innovative primary care teams, including those grounded in new processes such as the Patient-Centered Medical Home and interprofessional teams that include new types of health professionals, particularly psychologists and other integrated behavioral health clinicians. The article describes key factors that support or hinder primary care teamwork, as well as evidence of the impact of these team-based models on patient outcomes, costs, and team members. It also discusses the role of primary care teams within multiteam systems (or 'teams of teams'), which are organized around the needs of patients and families, and the unique challenges these systems pose to coordinating care. The article concludes with recommendations for advancing teams in primary care, including changes in payment, descriptions of team competencies, models for primary care team training, and research necessary to inform the gaps in scientific knowledge. (PsycINFO Database Record

Are We Working Well with Others? How the Multi Team Systems Impact Software Quality

Background: There are many studies on software development teams, but few about the interactions between teams. Current findings suggest that these multi-team systems may have a significant impact on software development projects. Aim: The objective of this exploratory study is to provide more evidence on multi-team systems in software engineering and identify challenges with a potential impact on software quality. Method: A non-participatory approach was used to collect data on one development project within a large telecommunication organization. Verbal interactions between team members were analyzed using a coding scheme following the Grounded Theory approach. Results: The results show that the interactions between teams are often technical in nature, outlining technical dependencies between departments, external providers, and even clients. Conclusion: This article hypothesizes that managers of large software project should (1) identify external teams most likely to interfere with their development work, to (2) appoint brokers to redirect external requests to the appropriate resource, and to (3) ensure that there are opportunities to discuss technical issues at the multi-team level. Failure to do so could results in delays and the persistence of codebase-wide issues.

Conflict management for co‐ordination between shift teams in Shanghai subway stations

Conflict among teams is inevitable in a multiteam system. Drawing on the theory of co‐operation and competition, we proposed and tested a model linking the approaches teams adopt to conflict, inter‐team co‐ordination, and multiteam system performance. Data collected from 123 operation teams in 44 subway stations in Shanghai revealed that co‐operative conflict management positively related to inter‐team co‐ordination, which in turn positively related to performance of the multiteam system. The relationship between competitive conflict management and inter‐team co‐ordination was insignificant and was moderated by co‐operative conflict management. When co‐operative conflict management was at a low level, competitive conflict management negatively related to inter‐team co‐ordination.

The bittersweet effect of power disparity

PurposeCollaborative systems are particular cases of multi-team systems in which several groups representing various interests meet to debate and generate solutions on complex societal issues. Stakeholder diversity in such systems often triggers power differences and disparity and the study explores the dual role of power disparity in collaborative settings. The purpose of this paper is to extend the power approach-inhibition model (Keltner et al., 2003) to the group level of analysis and argue that, on the positive side, power disparity increases the cognitive activity of the interacting groups (i.e. task-related debates), while on the other hand it generates a negative affective climate.Design/methodology/approachThe authors collected data at two time points across nine behavioral simulations (54 teams, 239 participants) designed to explore the cognitive and affective dynamics between six parties interacting in a collaborative decision task.FindingsThe results show that power disparity increases cognitive activity in collaborative multi-party systems, while it hinders the affective climate, by increasing relationship conflict and decreasing psychological safety among the stakeholders.Practical implicationsThis study provides important theoretical and practical contributions mostly for the consultation processes, as interventions might be directed at fostering the positive effects of power disparity in collaborative setting, while mitigating its drawbacks.Originality/valueBy extending the approach-inhibition model to the group level, this is one of the first empirical studies to examine the dual nature of the impact that power disparity has on the cognitive (i.e. positive effect) and affective (i.e. negative effect) dynamics of multi-party collaborative systems (i.e. multi-team systems).

Communication in the Spaceflight Multi-Team System: Training and Technology Recommendations to Support Boundary Spanners

Long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) in space rely on the coordinated efforts of a large, dynamic, and global multi-team system (MTS) that crosses organizational, geographic, cultural, and temporal boundaries. A key role in the spaceflight MTS is the leader who connects or spans the boundaries between distinct teams and supports the development of team cognition. The purpose of the present paper is to provide recommendations on how to train “boundary spanner” leaders and the tools they use to coordinate and communicate with teams in the context of a LDEM MTS. To this end, we address four specific questions focused on 1) how the MTS will change for future missions, 2) identifying the primary boundary spanners, 3) identifying the key attitudes, behaviors, and cognitions (ABCs) for effective boundary spanners, and 4) communication technologies to support the development of team cognition in the MTS. Results indicate six critical boundary spanner roles in the NASA Mission Control Center and 12 ABCs that should be trained. We conclude with concrete recommendations for NASA and its partners to empirically test different training approaches and commercial task management tools the MTS can use to improve communication efficiency and accuracy.

Leveraging a team-centric approach to diagnosing multiteam system functioning: The role of intrateam state profiles

The increased reliance on team-based structures within 21st century organizations has sparked a stream of research investigating the drivers of collaboration within and across multiteam systems (MTS), comprised of distinct, interdependent component teams. To date, MTS research tends to rely on the simplified—and potentially inaccurate—assumption that component teams within a MTS are homogenous with regard to their emergent intrateam properties (e.g., team attitudes, behaviors, cognitions). We suggest that team-centric approaches may better characterize the ways in which emergent intrateam properties might vary across different MTS component teams—operationalized with what we term ‘intrateam state profiles.’ Leveraging cancer care MTSs as an illustrative example, we detail the need for team-centric approaches as complementary to traditional, variable-centric approaches to studying collective phenomena. Specifically, we explore intrateam state profiles as a mechanism for understanding complex interactions of emergent properties within teams that may profoundly affect system functioning and associated HRM practices.

Application of Computational Simulation in Organizational Research

This presenter symposium brings together researchers from diverse fields of organizational research to present their work using computational simulation. The first paper conducted by Cronin and Vancouver illustrates how to make theoretical models that have a dynamic component and how simulation helps us not only to test such models, but also to think through them in the first place. The next paper conducted by Will explains how the relationship between collective outcomes and the individual-to-individual interaction patterns from which they emerge can first be fleshed out by phenomena-based modeling and then further refined by exploratory modeling in Netlogo's flocking model. The third study conducted by Trinh and Bao continues to explore the application of computational simulation to investigate the group phenomenon. In the last study, Kennedy, Sommer, and Nguyen applied Virtual experimentation to investigate organizational members' behaviors and interactions on large-scale projects using multi-team systems (MTS). Our purpose for this symposium is to clarify what simulations are and how they work. We attempt to provide a roadmap for how to apply computational simulation methods to our own research and encourage the management theorists to appreciate and best garner the benefits of simulation methods.

The Benefits of Not Seeing Eye to Eye with Leadership: Divergence in Risk Preferences Impacts Multiteam System Behavior and Performance

Multiteam systems are large structures of interdependent teams that coordinate via planning before embarking on important projects. Although rarely studied, theory suggests that expression of convergent versus divergent goals and preferences during planning by leadership and component teams matters for multiteam system performance. Addressing this important issue, in a sample of multiteam systems consisting of Air Force officers, we examine how convergent versus divergent preferences for risk expressed during planning by the leadership and component teams impact multiteam system behavior and performance during the performance episode. Drawing from literatures on multiteam systems, diversity, and risk we posit and show that divergent (vs. convergent) preferences for risk have positive implications for multiteam system behavior and performance. Specifically, when the leadership and component teams hold divergent risk preferences, multiteam systems engage in more aspirational behavior and perform better. Alt...

The Social Forces Behind Leadership Network Formation in Multiteam Systems

Leadership is pivotal to the success of teams and multiteam systems (MTSs). MTSs require leadership bridges be built within and between teams, some of whom have competing interests. We explore thre...

The Paradox of Leading Multi-Team Systems

Leaders often face goals too large and/or complex to be performed by a single organization or team, particularly in today’s dynamic environments. One answer to this challenge is multi-team systems ...

Language and Leadership in Multiteam Systems

This study investigates leadership emergence in multiteam systems comprised of four, 4-person disciplinary teams tasked with solving a complex and interdisciplinary problem in a lab setting. It adv...

The Antecedents and Implications of Information Sharing Processes in Multiteam Systems

Sharing information is a critical component of team and organizational functioning. Information is a resource which must be effectively distributed between individuals and subsequently synthesized....

Challenges to multiteam system leadership: an analysis of leadership during the management of railway disruptions

Rail traffic is controlled by operators working in multiple control centres. Although each of these control centres enjoy quite some autonomy and authority, their activities are highly interdependent. This is especially the case during the management of disruptions. In this study, we look at the role of leader teams with system-wide responsibilities and the task of synchronizing the control centres’ activities. Research on leadership in this multiteam setting of networked control centres, which operate in a dynamic and time-compressed environment, is limited. Hence, this study explores the behaviours and functions of these leader teams during the management of two large-scale disruptions in the Dutch railway system. We will show how various factors influence the ability to provide leadership within this specific real-world context. This study demonstrates that combining insights from the literature on multiteam systems and resilience engineering can contribute to our knowledge of the critical challenges of control in polycentric adaptive systems.

Communication and Sensemaking in the Dutch Railway System: Explaining coordination failure between teams using a mixed methods approach

Early in 2014, the Dutch railway system spiralled out of control after traffic management was confronted with the decision to take four double switches and two rail tracks out of service. A lack of coordination between the responsible teams resulted in the decision to stop all traffic in one of the busiest parts of the network during the rush hour. In this study we aim to understand why the teams in the Dutch railway system were not able to adopt a coordinated approach to reschedule rail services. To answer this question, we used a mixed-method approach by combining dynamic network analysis (DNA) with sensemaking. Our analyses show that a diverging framing of the situation accumulated over time, leading to inconsistent actions, incorrect assumptions and a lack of effective communication. Informal and indirect communication spurred uncertainty and promoted negative emotions, which eventually resulted in a conflict between the actors. We discuss the difficulties of managing ambiguous events in multi-team systems.

Structural influences upon coordination and performance in multiteam systems

Building upon organizational design and boundary spanning and multilevel literatures, we propose a theoretical framework that extends previous work on the drivers of multiteam system (MTS) coordination and performance. Our proposal integrates aspects of functional process interdependence and different integration mechanisms used within MTSs to better elucidate how different coordination processes emerge. The framework exposes potential countervailing or confluent effects of coordination processes on performance and, thereby, reconciles seemingly incongruent findings regarding the effect of different approaches to coordination on MTSs performance. In addition, our framework helps managers consider the multilevel nature of MTS coordination processes in ways that assist them in selecting an approach to effectively address the coordination challenges inherent in these complex systems.

SiMAMT

Multi-agent multi-team systems are commonly seen in environments where hierarchical layers of goals are at play. For example, theater-wide combat scenarios where multiple levels of command and control are required for proper execution of goals from the general to the foot soldier. Additionally, similar structures can be seen in game environments, where agents work together as teams to compete with other teams. The different agents within the same team must, while maintaining their own “personality”, work together and coordinate with each other to achieve a common team goal. This paper develops strategy-based multi-agent multi-team systems, where strategy is framed as an instrument at the team level to coordinate the multiple agents of a team in a cohesive way. The authors present SiMAMT, a framework for strategy-based multi-agent multi-team systems. The different components of the framework, including strategy simulation, strategy inference, strategy evaluation, and strategy selection are described. A formal specification of strategy and strategy-based multi-agent multi-team systems is provided. An example and experimental results are given to illustrate the proposed framework and its efficacy.

From Teams of Experts to Mindful Expert Teams and Multiteam Systems

From Teams of Experts to Mindful Expert Teams and Multiteam Systems

A multilevel model of multiteam motivation and performance

Teams are increasingly engaged in networked interaction across both team and organizational boundaries in order to achieve complex, higher order goals. In contrast to theoretical work on goal pursuit within isolated teams, there is an absence of theoretical models focused on systems composed of such teams. In response, we propose a predictive model to improve understanding of the nature of motivational processes leading to performance in interdependent systems of teams. This model is grounded on goal hierarchy characteristics (goal level, priority, and degree of compatibility) and functional process interdependence (sequential, reciprocal, intensive) that differentially affect both goal setting and goal striving processes across component team and multiteam levels. The model also illustrates how goal choice and goal striving in multiteam systems (MTSs) can be viewed from multilevel and multiphasic perspectives. We discuss the implications of the model for understanding, researching, and effectively managing the motivational mechanisms underlying MTSs performance.